The award-winning astrophysicist, author, talk show host, and director of the Hayden Planetarium stars in a PETA ad that encourages people to have empathy for all their fellow Earthlings. In the ad, which was shot in Dr. Tyson’s Hayden Planetarium office in New York, Dr. Tyson appears above the words “You Don’t Have to Be a Rocket Scientist to Know That Kindness Is a Virtue.”

Here’s the ad he helped PETA make:

Tyson did more than help make a PETA ad.

Dr. Tyson also sat down for an interview with PETA President Ingrid E. Newkirk to discuss everything from the importance of instilling empathy in children to how observing dogs in his childhood helped him develop his critical thinking skills.

Here’s the interview, where Tyson lays on the sciencey talk as he promotes the PETA perspective.

PETA is a very well organized and well funded animal rights group that has long sought to ban the use of animals in scientific research. Here is a pic of one of their actvist offices:

And here’s part of an ad campaign where they liken scientists to murderers:

I bring this up because many people are under the false impression that pro-science communicators and activists are truly pro-science. But as it often the case, these are people using science to enrich themselves or advance a socio-political agenda. Yes, they can be “pro-science” when it comes to climate change or evolution, but when it comes to animal rights, oddly enough, it turns out many of these “pro-science” voices support or are sympathetic to the animal rights attacks on the scientific community.

The animal rights issue is one where people can have sincere differences of opinion concerning ethics. But the fact remains that much of the advances in medical and biological research are indebted to animal experimentation. Thus, anyone who postures as a Defender of Science, a Pro-Science Activist, or an Ambassador of Science is obligated to defend animal experimentation in science. Otherwise, those postures are fundamentally dishonest and deceptive.

The animal rights issue is one that exposes the fake essence of the pro-science posturing of many supposed champions of science. So we’ll have to add that to the list of things to explore.

2 Responses to Neil deGrasse Tyson Helps Promote PETA

“Yes, they can be “pro-science” when it comes to climate change or evolution, but when it comes to animal rights, oddly enough, it turns out many of these “pro-science” voices support or are sympathetic to the animal rights attacks on the scientific community.”

As with nuclear energy, the only alternative that truly solves the problem of the amount of energy and the frequency in which it produces, but then as “political people” they need to trust other people with the necessary materials, “to help humanity as a whole”, a thing that they don’t want, so they jump into the environmentalist position in this case.

“The animal rights issue is one where people can have sincere differences of opinion concerning ethics. But the fact remains that much of the advances in medical and biological research are indebted to animal experimentation. Thus, anyone who postures as a Defender of Science, a Pro-Science Activist, or an Ambassador of Science is obligated to defend animal experimentation in science. Otherwise, those postures are fundamentally dishonest and deceptive.
The animal rights issue is one that exposes the fake essence of the pro-science posturing of many supposed champions of science. So we’ll have to add that to the list of things to explore.”

True, otherwise this person will “limit” science (?). Of course they can go ahead with animal experimentation., because they can not use humans for experimentation thanks to the same set of ethics.

“Tyson did more than help make a PETA ad.
Dr. Tyson also sat down for an interview with PETA President Ingrid E. Newkirk to discuss everything from the importance of instilling empathy in children to how observing dogs in his childhood helped him develop his critical thinking skills.”

Some people use those words too much: “critical thinking skills”
If they have the belief that other people thinking is bad or flawed without “critical thinking skill” then what is the “critical” in their “thinking skills”? What is the difference between “critical thinking skills” and thinking (skills = ???)?